• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
  • We hope the site problems here are now solved, however, if you still have any issues, please start a ticket in Contact Us

Commentary on Jude Verse One

Status
Not open for further replies.

AnthonyE1778

Well-Known Member
Nov 16, 2005
459
23
37
Texas
✟702.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
This is my commentary on the first verse of the Epistle of Jude. Please tell me what ya'll think and if I should continue. Feel free to debate or bring up questions of controversial matters. Thanks in advance!

Jude is one rich epistle which approaches several key and controversial concepts in the church today. Jude himself is a half-brother of the earthly Jesus since he was the brother of James (Matt. 13:55). In this 25-verse text, Jude approaches the topic of Divine Election, Prayer’s Defense, False Teachers, and Apostasy. All of the content of this epistle is just as applicable today as it was back in Jude’s time. Jude writes his epistle in an argumentative form. That is not to say that he is being negative, only that he is enlightening believers as to certain facts and arguing against or for them so as to further the Kingdom of God.
The date and recipients of this epistle are impossible to determine though speculations have been made. Most claim that Jude came immediately after 2nd Peter because of the numerous parallel passages contained within. None can know for sure. The recipients of this epistle are never made clear. I believe that it was to the Christian population as a whole. “To the ones called in God the Father,” says Jude in the first verse of his epistle. In fully expositing this epistle I hope to explain to the reader, through the usage of the original Greek text, the meaning behind the words used in the passage.

We start with the first verse, which is literally[1] translated:

”Jude, of Jesus Christ a slave, brother and of James, to those in God (the) Father having been set apart, and by Jesus Christ having been kept, called:”

The Literal interpretation of the Bible (Jay Green, Sr.)[2] translates this verse as:

“Jude, a slave of Jesus Christ, and brother of James, to the ones called in God the Father, having been set apart, and having been kept through Jesus Christ:”

Humility and the Christian Church
“Jude, a slave of Jesus Christ,”
The author begins by introducing himself as Jude. Notice that He does not proudly present himself as merely a follower of Christ, but rather a slave. The word for slave here is doulos, which means “servant”. A servant is naturally a follower of someone with whom one serves. The servant is at his master’s command, doing everything that his master instructs him to do. The slave is a man of servile condition.
Jude is not being prideful or boastful, but rather being very humble about his occupation in relation to Jesus. One can immediately see how this is in contrast to today’s Christian world at large. Many pastors, elders and church-goers parade around as if they are God’s gift to mankind. Pompous people such as these can not produce divine inspiration because their minds are extremely clouded with their big-headed arrogance which gets in the way of their ability to distinguish divine viewpoint[3] from their human viewpoint[4].
Some things to watch out for when observing biblical teachers: (2 Pt. 2; Galatians 1:10;4:17; 2 Timothy 3:6; 2 Peter 2:3,18; Revelations 2:14,20, 2nd Corinthians 10:10)

1. Flowery Language – Many who use elaborate words and “flowery language” in their messages do so in order to cloud the audience’s judgment and deceive, making them think that they are hearing great wisdom. What the audience may actually be hearing in this case is heretical doctrine, extraneous material, or “fluff” in order to stretch the thin message out over a period of time[5]. There are some pastors, however, that use this naturally, but beware that they are not letting it cloud the message. That can only indicate human viewpoint because a message from God need not be enhanced with big, flowery words.
2. Seeker-friendly messages within the church – Seeker-friendly means: a message that is preached within the church that is for all to hear, both believers and unbelievers. Pastors preach these types of messages with the best intentions, however the church is only meant for the edification of believers. All throughout the New Testament, there is never any mention of unbelievers in church. The Church is always mentioned in light of believers only. God will add to the church’s numbers if the people of the church are doing their job and exercising their spiritual gifts effectively (Jeremiah 30:19, Acts 9:31, Acts 16:5). Evangelism and the Church as a whole should be kept separate, in my opinion.
3. Surface level material – Many common pastors preach with such surface-level material so that the people will easily understand. However, this is surface-level. This is milk and will not edify a firm believer. A believer should find a small group for that. This is the chief reason for a state of non-growth in a church. I am not talking about numbers, but rather about spiritual growth. It is because the members as lambs do not receive the rich pure milk from the true mother church, but receive some diluted, adulterated milk, and therefore now, cannot digest, assimilate, strong meat when it is fed to them to make spiritual growth. Surface level material preached within the church is milk, which in and of itself is not a bad thing, but it is more like skim milk.


While there are many other things to watch out for, these are some of the chief concerns. The humility of the church is absolutely essential (Proverbs 11:2, 15:33, Philippians 2:3, Acts 20:19-20). Where there are pastors and elders and televangelists that parade around claiming and thinking that they are God’s supreme gift to Mankind, you should know to stay away from arrogant people such as that.
One of the most important things to look out for, however, is the presence of the gift of pastor-teacher (2nd Timothy 2:2, 4:2), for one must have this in order to preach and teach to a congregation. Human viewpoint is all that can come out of the mouth of someone who has not received this gift yet chooses to live a life as if he had it. That is in pure rebellion to God and God will not sanction it. Always remember to be humble in your Christian walk, not boasting and proudly declaring that you are a follower of God. Now this is not to say that you should not be thankful for this, indeed you should! However, to use pride for personal gain and “honor” would be an anathema. Humility is a key to the church! Live it!

[1] It must be noted that while this is a literal, word-for-word translation from the original Greek text, the English words themselves can in no way do the original Greek words justice in communicating the meaning. For instance, the word delight cannot do any justice to the original Greek meaning, which pictures one bending down toward the object of one’s delight. The translation following the exact literal one is designed to help in that area.

[2] For the purposes of this exposition, a literal word-for-word translation will be presented for every verse in this epistle, followed by The literal interpretation of the Bible translation by Jay Green, Sr.

[3] Divine viewpoint is that which is in direct contrast to human viewpoint. Divine viewpoint is that which comes straight out of the Word of God and is doctrinally sound. It is essentially the words of God being spoken through a person whether it is a preacher, elder, or a Christian layman. Only people with proper biblical hermeneutics and a solid relationship with God the Father can produce Divine viewpoint, the rest is human, is fallible, because of those qualities is also false.

[4] Human viewpoint is that which is in direct contrast to Divine viewpoint. Human viewpoint is that which comes from a fallible human understanding. It cannot be mixed in any way, shape, or form with Divine viewpoint. Human viewpoint comes from our imperfect and mortal minds and therefore, apart from Divine viewpoint, cannot produce anything biblically and doctrinally sound and can therefore only produce falsities and heresies.

[5] A message coming from Divine viewpoint will never be thin, slight, or trivial.


 

AnthonyE1778

Well-Known Member
Nov 16, 2005
459
23
37
Texas
✟702.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
“and brother of James,”
So Jude introduces himself as a slave, or servant, of Jesus Christ, but also as a brother of James. James is said to be the heir of Mary and Joseph after the birth of Jesus, which would make Jude a half-brother of our Savior. The fact that he presents himself as a slave to Jesus only further enhances his humility. I would never say that I was a slave to my older brother! Yet, Jude here has no problem saying that he is a slave to his. Again, exercise humility fellow believer!

“to the ones called in God the Father,”
The starter, “to the ones” denotes a specific band of people. The next word, called, is the Greek word hagiazo. This word simply means “sanctified”. However, this word always denotes a holy sanctification whenever this verb is used. The word is in the perfect tense, which means that this action was completed in the past, once and for all, not needing to be repeated. Believers only need to be saved once, only need to be sanctified once. It is in the past, never needing to be done again. It is in the passive voice which means that the subject is the recipient and is the receiver of the action; the ones are the recipients of this “calling”. This goes to enhance the fact that it is God who calls the unbeliever to be saved. There is absolutely nothing that we as humans can do to become saved. It is a participle which means that it is a statement of principle.
The word directly following, in, is the Greek word en. This is a primary preposition denoting position and instrumentality and means, in, by, with, etc…So Jude is addressing certain people that have been sanctified in what follows. God the Father. That would be the head of the trinity. Jude is addressing a specific band of people who have been sanctified by God the Father. The ones called is an action committed by God the Father. God sanctifies us, not the other way around. There is nothing that we can do to make ourselves sanctified; to make ourselves saved. Many modern televangelists and pastors claim that if you “pray this one prayer, then you will be saved” or “you must walk the aisle.” That is a dangerous distorting of the scriptures (Acts 15:11, Ephesians 2:8, 2nd Corinthians 3:5), taking the simple salvation message presented in 1st Peter 2:24 and 1st Corinthians 15:1-4 and twisting it around to include some sort of false commitment that one will never consistently keep. Jude is therefore writing to those that God has called to His glory, has called to be apart of His family.

“having been set apart,”
The believers have been set apart. Set apart from what? Unbelievers! Set apart in the fact that we, as believers, will be able to enjoy the gift of Heaven in eternity while the believers will not be able to experience anything but personal torment and sorrow. We have been set apart, and we should be proud of that.

“and having been kept through Jesus Christ”
The word and here is the Greek word kai, which simply means ‘in addition to’, or ‘and’. Having been kept is all one word in the Greek that has been rightfully transliterated into three words by the translators. The word is tereo, which means ‘to take under one’s wing, to tend to, to preserve.’ We, as believers in our Lord Jesus Christ, have been set apart from unbelievers as well as being preserved by Jesus Christ. Tereo is in the perfect tense which means that at the moment we came to believe in Christ, we were preserved. This preservation (keeping) started in the past when we first came to salvation, and the perfect tense also means that there is no need for this to be done again. There is no need for this “preservation” to start over again, and no need for the action to be repeated, for it was completed in the past. God “took us under his wing” in the past when we came to believe and got ourselves a ticket to heaven once and for all. Tereo is in the passive voice which means that this refers back to the subject of the sentence as being the recipient of the action. The ones called are the beneficiaries of this preservation. It is a participle which means that it is a statement of principle.

OSAS: Once Saved Always Saved

There are many objectors to the principle that once a person is saved that they are always saved. This verse proves the OSAS (Once Saved Always Saved) principle to be true. Coming to belief in God happens once in the past, not needing to be accomplished again. This means that at the moment we come to genuine belief in the principles stated in 1st Corinthians 15:1-4, then we are forever sealed in God’s temporal and eternal plan for believers and permanently set apart from the unbelievers. From the moment we genuinely believe we are destined to go to heaven. This means that no amount of carnality can divert us from heaven. The carnal Christian will, however, receive discipline (Hebrews 12), but more importantly will lose eternal rewards (Galatians 5; Ephesians 5) and enable the “sin unto death” doctrine unto themselves (1st John 5:16). There are many carnal Christians in the world today, but this does not mean that they are not saved and on the path to hell, as John MacArthur’s Lordship Salvation suggests.

The Doctrine of Divine Election and Calling

One will immediately notice that this verse indeed has a lot to say about election and God’s calling. The two words: election and calling are two different terms though and are not to be used interchangeably. They are related, but are different actions performed by God(Matthew 22:14, Romans 9:11 2nd Peter 1:10) and God only. This doctrine of Election and Calling is one of needless controversy in the Church today but I do not see why, because the Bible is very clear on the matter.
First of all, if you believe in any sort of Divine Election or Calling, then you have to be a ‘Saved by Grace’ advocate. These two actions are related to the principle of grace, not works (Romans 11:5,6; 2nd Timothy 1:9). There is absolutely no way that you can believe in the Doctrine of Election and think that one is saved by the amount of good works committed on this earth. The two just do not coincide at all, especially when put under the Divine light of the three verses above.
Election took place in eternity past (Ephesians 1:14, 2nd Timothy 1:9). God is the one who chose us to be apart of His family, not the other way around (Ephesians 1:5, 2nd Peter 1:3). If we were to be the ones to choose, then salvation would be based off of our human works, which we know that it is not. The elect are the few, not the many. God told us this ahead of time (Matthew 7:13,14; 22:14). Also, the elect tend to not be from the rich and famous of our society as described in 1st Corinthians 1:26 and James 2:5.
One of the overriding reasons that God chose some and not others, in eternity past, is God's ability to foresee all things of the future, including individual response to the gospel (Omniscience demands that God foreknew everything that would occur from eternity past. However, foreknowledge makes nothing certain). Some say that He chose some for his own good pleasure and that we cannot even understand what was behind His choosing.
Scriptural support comes from these verses. 1Peter1,2,
Acts 26:5; Romans 8:29; 11:2; 1st Peter 1:20, 2Pet.3:17, Acts.4:28; Romans 8:29,30; 1st Corinthians 2:7; Eph.1:4,11, Romans 8:30, Romans 11:2, 1st Peter 1:20
One might also look at the parable of election and calling found in Matthew 22. The king is God the Father, who gives a wedding feast for his Son, the Lord Jesus Christ (vv.1,2). The slaves, who are sent out to invite guests, are those who were sent to the Jews in the early Christian era (vv.3,4). Their preoccupation with other things and their mistreatment of the slaves represents negative volition and persecution (vv.5,6; 1Thess.2:16). The king's destruction of them and their city represents the fall of Jerusalem by the Romans in 70AD (v.7). The new guest list represents the spread of the gospel to the Gentiles over the course of the Church Age (the period of Israel’s unbelief; vv.8-10). The unprepared guest represents the Millennial unbeliever who enters the Wedding Hall in the Millennial Kingdom, but is removed and cast into hell (vv.11-13). Verse 14 applies the parable to all mankind, and sums up the doctrine.

The security of our election and calling (Romans 11:29 "for the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable" [God has no regrets in regard to those He has chosen and called]. See also Romans 8:33-39; v.33 "Who will bring a charge against God's elect? God is the One who justifies"). All whom God chose will be called and saved in the course of time (John 17:1-3).
One can see how this is in pertinence to the Doctrine as brought up in the first verse of the Epistle of Jude. “To the ones called in God the Father, having been set apart, and having been kept through Jesus Christ.” While it might not seem like it on the outset, this verse merely confirms the fact that God chose us in eternity past if one were to just read it. Called is in the past tense. Better yet, the entire section is in the past tense. God called us in the past, it happened to us in the past, and it does not need to be repeated.
 
Upvote 0

justified

Well-Known Member
Oct 8, 2005
1,048
25
41
✟23,831.00
Faith
Protestant
what do you mean by that? please explain. I am an aspiring pastor and would appreciate all of the 'help' i can get.
Well, I guess you've got two choices, since you are an aspiring pastor. You called this a study/commentary, which suggests to me you want to really want to get into it, find out the "original intention," etc. If you want to just make it available to your "congregation" in a such a way that they can be exhorted from it, that's a very different story. I can't help you with the second one, but in terms of the first I can offer some suggestions.

Assuming a commentary-style job is what you're after, I'll just note some things one particular part of what you wrote, as an example:

“Jude, a slave of Jesus Christ,”
The author begins by introducing himself as Jude.

This is the typical epistolary introduction found in all Hellenistic letters. It shouldn't be anything to write home about. For example, you write:

He does not proudly present himself as merely a follower of Christ, but rather a slave.
So when Paul says that he is a apostolos Iesou christou, does that mean he is being proud? It's fine to bring out the importance of being servants of the LORD, but in terms of the intent of the letter, it means very little.

The word for slave here is doulos, which means “servant”.
One of the things that I was taught when I studied Greek, and then again when I studied other languages, was that you should do your best to refrain from using a language you don't know. Your statement that the word doulos, δουλος means "servant" (and yet you translated slave?) is really useless. The word means both "slave" or "servant" and the distinction is not important for the author here.

Jude is not being prideful or boastful, but rather being very humble about his occupation in relation to Jesus.

First you would have to say what Jude's occupation was. Paul calls himself a δουλος -- does that mean Jude was an apostle?

etc. I might also mention when you comment on "brother of James" you automatically assume it's the brother of Christ -- whereas nothing in the text says so.

Just an example. If you are after exegetical commentary, I would suggest reading what others have said. For example, the best commentary on Jude (for which some Greek knowledge is useful) is Richard Bauckham's in the Word Biblical Commentary series.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AnthonyE1778
Upvote 0

AnthonyE1778

Well-Known Member
Nov 16, 2005
459
23
37
Texas
✟702.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
justified said:
Well, I guess you've got two choices, since you are an aspiring pastor. You called this a study/commentary, which suggests to me you want to really want to get into it, find out the "original intention," etc. If you want to just make it available to your "congregation" in a such a way that they can be exhorted from it, that's a very different story. I can't help you with the second one, but in terms of the first I can offer some suggestions.

Assuming a commentary-style job is what you're after, I'll just note some things one particular part of what you wrote, as an example:

[/font][/size]
This is the typical epistolary introduction found in all Hellenistic letters. It shouldn't be anything to write home about. For example, you write:


So when Paul says that he is a apostolos Iesou christou, does that mean he is being proud? It's fine to bring out the importance of being servants of the LORD, but in terms of the intent of the letter, it means very little.


One of the things that I was taught when I studied Greek, and then again when I studied other languages, was that you should do your best to refrain from using a language you don't know. Your statement that the word doulos, δουλος means "servant" (and yet you translated slave?) is really useless. The word means both "slave" or "servant" and the distinction is not important for the author here.


First you would have to say what Jude's occupation was. Paul calls himself a δουλος -- does that mean Jude was an apostle?

etc. I might also mention when you comment on "brother of James" you automatically assume it's the brother of Christ -- whereas nothing in the text says so.

Just an example. If you are after exegetical commentary, I would suggest reading what others have said. For example, the best commentary on Jude (for which some Greek knowledge is useful) is Richard Bauckham's in the Word Biblical Commentary series.

Many thanks for your help:)
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.